Aguiar-Branco is allowing a “crime” in Parliament

Strategy of the President of the Assembly of the Republic in the face of arrival was clear from the beginning. It is not resulting, and May confirmed.

José Pedro Aguiar-white He was president of the Assembly of the Republic for the first time in March last year.

He said at first that he wants to be labeled as a “consensus generator,” but the label has been another: “coward”, the Lord who does not leave the; or being much criticized when I said that Racist comments are allowed in the Assembly of the Republic.

It became famous and took place in May last year. André Ventura said that “Turks are not exactly known to be the most hardworking people in the world.” Alexandra Leitão asked Aguiar-Branco: “If a bench says that a certain race or ethnicity is more dumb, more lazy, or less worthy can it?” The president answered quickly: “In my view, it can.”

Applause from the arrival of the arrival And from there, Aguiar-Branco has been applauded several times to his right. It’s all a matter of freedom of expressionclaim.

On the one hand, the President of the Assembly of the Republic has drawn attention to the deputies of the arrival and, last year, showed that it is already starting to be in Parliament.

But, on the other hand, also has contributed to the noisefor the messages and reactions to the “mouths” that come from the arrival – all because there is freedom of expression in the palace of St. Bento.

Aguiar-white always said it is against the “cancellation theory.” That’s why, Let it speak.

Because, he claimed at the beginning of his first term, the voters it would go to assess the posture of the deputies. That is, it left the deputies (from the arrival, essentially) show what they are, to say what they want – and then be “punished” at the polls.

It is strategy That was this, if it was to see a significant drop in arriving in the following legislative elections… Did not result. The party rose 20% in the number of deputies in the May elections this year.

The “crime”

The left, especially the PS and the free, has been constantly complained of the criteria different that the President of the Assembly of the Republic uses, in relation to the interventions of the deputies.

Still a few days ago, at the time of, Pedro Delgado Alves (PS) spoke directly to Aguiar-Branco: “There are limits of tolerable. And your excellence, for a moment, before the intervention of Mr André Ventura-who designated the PS leader with much worse mischief-You were silent! Cowardly!”

And the scale increases. Already this year, in February, the controversy arose around: “seem a death”, or “freak”, or “drugged” were expressions heard in this debate.

Last Friday Nuno Gabriel, deputy of the arrival, said to Filipa Pinto, deputy of Free: “This thing of always walking in this sex and children… O Lady Deputy, with all due respect, you can not be well: and do what you want!” When I was talking about the discipline of citizenship.

It was these, and other examples, who led Eurico Bright Days to warn: “Who wants to propagate hatred can say everything they want. And Aguiar-White has been a defender that, within Parliament, There may be hate speech. That is Authorize deputies, within parliament, to do something that we, outside the gates of parliament, know that it is a crime“The PS parliamentary leader analyzed in an interview with Lusa agency.

What is hate speech?

According to the crime of incitement to hatred and violence, the so -called “hate speech” crime happens when “someone who, through a means of public dissemination, provoke or incite the practice of acts of violence, defamation, injury, or threat to people or groups of people, namely due to its ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability“.

To be considered a crime, the punishable conduct It has to be done “In the public space And involve any means intended for disclosure, which presupposes the use of verbal speech, the pamphlet, graffiti, poster postering, use of the press and web sites, as well as the placement of messages on the internet outside the closed groups. ”

Public use of these means of disclosure serves to “the rude apology, negation or trivialization of genocide, war or against peace and humanity crimes”.

At the last point, it is read: “It is required that the use of the means of dissemination designed to make the apology or denial of crimes against peace and humanity have a effect or concrete discriminatory resulttranslated into the provocation of acts of violence, in the practice of crimes of injury or defamation, threat and incitement to violence or hatred against “person or group of people because of their race, color, ethnic or national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender or physical or psychic disability”.

The crime of incitement to hatred and violence is punished with prison sentence from 6 months to 5 years.

Interestingly, in May last year and a few days after the “Turkish case”, Aguiar-Branco the creation of a “vote of repudiation” against hate speeches.